Re: Guix system with home-environment

[phodina <phodina@protonmail.com>]

Hi Andrew,

On Wednesday, November 3rd, 2021 at 8:35 AM, Andrew Tropin <andrew@trop.in> wrote:

> On 2021-11-02 11:38, phodina wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just want to ask if it's possible to create an image which has both the operating-system and home-environment configuration together.
> >
> > Currently the way to build them is to do:
> >
> > ;; Guix System
> >
> > guix system build os.scm
> >
> > ;; Guix Home
> >
> > guix home build home.scm
> >
> > However, if I want to build and test a VM, I'm missing the home environment.
> >
> > Would it be the correct way to add additional record to user-account definition, which would instantiate the home-environment for the particular user?
> >
> > Or is there another way how to do that?
> >
> > Petr
>
> Hi again!)
>
> I have a plan to have a system service, which accepts list of pairs of
>
> user name and home-environment and instantiates home environments for
>
> these users during `guix system reconfigure`, but the task has a low
>
> priority right now. You can try to implement it yourself and send a
>
> patch for review or can wait until someone will do it.
>
> P.S. It doesn't have to be a separate service, maybe extending some
>
> existing record with additional field will also work.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Best regards,
>
> Andrew Tropin

I was exactly thinking of a record in the operating system for list of pairs (user and home-environment) as you suggest.

Though then it hit me - it's already there in user accounts.

Therefore why introduce complexity and not just modify them by one record for each user set by default to false.

Sure it's major modification but in order to get the functionality it will have to modify either users or operating-system (or another field within).

I understand it's low priority, I just wanted your opinion on this matter.

I'll look into that and try to come up with some implementation.

Petr